Camera Recommendation please.

darich

BillScarab wrote: »

Don't get hung up on Mega Pixels, it's not an indicator of image quality.

Never a truer word was said.

On dpreview, i believe they also give the size of the sensor in the camera. The size of the sensor plays a huge role in quality - the larger the better.
That's why your 3 or 5mp camera on your phone will never be as good as compact with the same resolution - the sensor is much smaller in the phone

If it's a choice between a few cameras, then the one with the largest sensor will give the best quality.
Lenses also play a part but if you stick with a reputable brand eg Canon, Nikon, Fuji etc then you'll be fine.

Personally, i'd buy from a camera manufacturer eg Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Kodak etc rather than an electronics manufacturer eg Casio, Samsung, Panasonic.

codger

Millionaire wrote: »

Sorry for the late reply guys/gals. I had to sort something out last minute then when i got back the website was down.

I prefer point and shoot cameras that I only have to set the settings once and then don't have to worry about them again.

I've messed with the Ixus 75 settings but to no avail to getting the sharpness up.

I will look at all your suggestions then see where I am. Will be back later.

OP:

Rather than hunting through different brands, it's more sensible to establish essential requirements. Where a compact digicam is concerned, the most obvious requirements are:

1) Wide angle lens. There's absolutely no point in buying a compact camera which will very often be used for informal indoor parties or gatherings if the damn thing can't get everyone into the shot.

2) Low light useability / flexible flash. Both are essential. No point in having a compact which can't work without flash in a medium-lit room, no point in having a compact, either, with a flash that's underpowered or is simply full-on or full-off.

3) Image stabilisation. Compacts are by virtue of their size / weight much more susceptible to camera shake than SLRs. You need IS to prevent that -- but not all IS systems are equal: there are some which claim to combat camera shake by slamming up the ISO (film speed, in old money) to levels so absurdly high that though an image is captured before it has time to "shake", the picture is well-nigh unuseable because of the "noise" that bedevils high ISO. So you need a compact which DOESN'T rely exclusively on ISO boost.

4) Lens quality. A compact with the highest megapixel rating in the world will be of no use at all if its lens is crap. Sadly, many compacts are sold on the numerical appeal of the former rather than the quality of the latter.

5) Lens flexibility (Zoom function.) Just as there are numerous cynical manufacturers out there who flog compact cameras sporting ISO ratings of astronomic value (though their cameras can't actually be depended to perform well at anything above 100) there are also cynical manufacturers out there flogging compacts -- especially, compacts -- with ludicrous promises of zoom performance. These promises are generally founded on something laughingly known as "digital zoom" which merely magnifies a pixel. IGNORE all such promises. It's optical zoom that you should consider.

6) Ease of use. A compact camera which offers 2,650 different picture modes is a jigsaw puzzle. Not a camera. You want to be able to quickly point-and-shoot, either via a quick and easy mode selection, or Full Auto. If you don't want to be able to quickly point-and-shoot, then you should be buying a dSLR. Not a compact.

7) LCD screen. The bigger is not necessarily the better. Though I like big screens on compacts -- and why not? -- Canon are only one of many manufacturers who have simply upsized their screens but without doing anything about the screen's resolution. Great, not. So don't be misled by size alone: check the resolution spec first.

8) Retained value. People frequently upgrade from a point-and-shoot compact to a dSLR. So buying a compact which nobody's heard of and has no reputation at all is money down the drain: you'll never re-sell.

On which basis, then, I'd recommend, like other posters here:

Panasonic.


The Panasonic Lumix DMC TZ3 is an excellent compact which meets all the above requirements. It handles well, works well, its low light wide angle performance is very, very good and its optical zoom is as good as it can possibly get in any compact from any manufacturer -- but then again, it is a Leica lens.

It will retain quite a bit of value (should you ever wish to resell) because, as a package, it's been so cleverly and carefully thought out (a phrase which also applies to the Image Stabilisation system employed by the TZ3.)

Alternatively, if you're looking for a compact which genuinely does all the thinking for you, and takes great pictures into the bargain, then the other camera worthy of consideration is:

Panasonic Lumix DMC FX55 (or its sibling, the cheaper Lumix DMC FX33). These models feature something Panasonic calls "Intelligent Auto" and for once, the phrase isn't manufacturer hype. Both models sport Leica wide angle lens, albeit their zoom capabilities are not as remarkable as the TZ3's. The Image Stabilisation system's the same though.

Although I tend to bewail the way big name brands monopolise so many different areas of consumer interest, I have to take my hat off to Panasonic: yes, it may be a player in every market from microwaves to TVs and hi-fi to domestic bread makers but, but: it has a scale of financial resources to draw upon to fund its product development that is simply beyond that of many rival camera manufacturers.

That level of investment is very obvious where both the TZ3 and the FX55 (I've used both, have kept the TZ3 only because I like its extraordinary zoom capability and don't actually need the "simplicity" of the FX55) are concerned.

Oh, a quickie final word: think of a digital camera as a computer with a lens and you've grasped what it's all about.

Which means it really would be sensible to invest in some after-camera processing software for your computer -- definitely NOT the full-blown versions of PhotoShop, but certainly one of the cheap, cheerful yet infinitely capable stripped-down versions of PS which Adobe also offers. You can pick 'em up cheap on eBay.

BillScarab

I agree with you about buying from a traditional camera manufacturer but I tend to make an exception for Panasonic as they have Leica lenses in them and do tend to get decent reviews.

I thoroughly agree regarding sensor size, the only trouble is most compacts seem to have 1/2.5" senses. Even the bigger ones tend to be around 1/1.7" which isn't a massive improvement although it is better. I find it really annoying that manufacturers develop these sophisticated top end compacts and bridge cameras and then put tiny sensors in them.

For anyone who's interested there's a good article about it here.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=sensor+sizes

EDIT: the above refers to darich's post, but nice post by the way codger

codger

BillScarab wrote: »

I agree with you about buying from a traditional camera manufacturer but I tend to make an exception for Panasonic as they have Leica lenses in them and do tend to get decent reviews.

That really is a cracking good point, Bill, because it highlights something I find truly ironic where camera purchases are concerned: here we are, in an era where what's leading edge this afternoon will be old hat tomorrow, yet many prospective buyers shop in exactly the same way their forbears did 50 or more years ago.

They buy because of the name.

Heaven's sake: why??

Way back when, brand quality certainly could be depended upon. Nowadays though, a brand is only as good as its product -- and oh boy, I've seen some really crap products from household name camera manufacturers and, conversely, some superb offerings from manufacturers of (at first sight!) the most unexpected kind -- for example: Nikon in the former category, Casio (!) in the latter.

(Though when one takes the trouble to delve into Casio's provenance, the situation becomes much clearer.)

A conservative approach to camera purchasing -- i.e., restricting yourself to "names" of some longevity -- is no more to be advised than restricting yourself to Ford or Vauxhall when shopping for a car.

Forget the "names". Instead, decide first what you want out of a camera (or a car!) Then buy one which matches those requirements.

Sadly, the problem for too many camera buyers is that they're targeted by manufacturers not on the basis of what they know, but on the basis of what they don't know.

So they often wind up with a "Big Name" compact camera which they take along to Grandma's 80th birthday party only to then find that yes, they really shouldn't have placed so much trust in manufacturer / retailer hype, but done some homework of their own first (beginning, because this is so frequently the case, with some understanding NOT of megapixels but of lens ability and the ESSENTIAL requirement in a pocketable point 'n shoot of wide angle. . .)

As to Panasonic, you'll have seen my reservations about its market dominance in so many, many areas. But the inescapable fact is that Panasonic is the Mr Megabucks in the compact camera sector, able to throw at its products more development money in a month than some rivals can manage in a year.

It knows it can't truly compete in the dSLR market (though to be fair, it's not making that bad a fist of it). But it also knows that, thanks to the vast sums of money it invested in tying in with Leica -- dear God though, Leica! -- it can deliver products in the compact camera sector that others must struggle to match, let alone out-perform.

Bottom line: would you really buy a camera off a firm that flogs microwaves and breadmakers???

Yes. And I'm delighted that I did!

sparvar

Canon Powershot A640, the quality is amazing. If quality is not so important get an IXUS. Canons take excellent pictures, try on ebuyer.com or amazon.co.uk,Best of luck!

Millionaire

Thanks everyone for their opinions. Greatly appreciated.

Sent the Ixus 75 back after a few more test shots, and I still was not happy with it. I totally understand the point about megapixels vs lens quality and sensor size etc

I have narrowed it down to three cameras from everyones advice:

Canon Ixus 860IS
Panasonic Lumix DMC TZ3
and the Panasonic Lumix FX55

Just need to go and get a hands on them and have a play around to see which one I like most.

To everyone who mentioned the powershots I looked at them but they seem bit too bulky to slide into my trouser pocket etc when out and about.

Even though Ive got a Pansonic GS250 Camcorder which is excellent I never gave the cameras a thought. But the TZ3 seems to get rave reviews.

codger

Good luck, Millionaire!

And definitely: go and have a play with 'em, see which you like best -- where compact camera reviews are concerned, I often wonder if some reviewers have (a) never held the camera at all or (b) have hands / fingers as tiny as a child's.

Certainly, the TZ3 is, in my experience, a camera that handles easily yet like all small cameras nevertheless needs care, otherwise you inadvertently hit unwanted controls: one-handed operation is something I'd never recommend.

Re pricing.

A slew of refurbished American TZ3s from Panasonic's Mexican plant have landed in the UK and are being listed on eBay as 'UK stock' with a non-useable 3-month USA-only warranty but by way of compensation, a 3-month "seller warranty".

Well yes, the cameras are in the UK. And yes, a refurbished camera can be a good buy. And yes, the sellers involved aren't scammers.

Even so.

The eBay UK audience herd instinct has seen some of the prices achieved by these listings reaching idiotic levels: for the same money, or perhaps just a few quid more, the UK version of the TZ3, brand new and complete with 12 months' guarantee, can be had for £168 including UK P&P at eGears (though that's not a website I've used before.)

Amazon UK had the average 'going rate' price of £178 (though this does include P&P) but as a reflection of demand has actually increased the price by £10 in the past couple of days to £188.

Finally, if you're looking for the comfort of a High Street supplier, then Jessops' usual £230 is a high price for reassurance / convenience.

However, Jessops currently has a 10% off promotion running (until next Monday only) so the TZ3 is £207.

Good luck with whichever camera you decide to buy -- even if it turns out not to be on the current short-list!

isofa

And to find the cheapest price, use https://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk

There are lots of similar discussions about cameras on this forum, so a search might help further.

Millionaire

Thank you Codger for advice and links. Thats excellent.

Thats an interesting thing you pointed out about the ebay Pana TZ3's, its not as good a deal as it seems.

I think I will stick to to either online retailers or retailers for my purchases.

Will update once I get the camera.

Thanks

BillScarab

https://www.7dayshop.com have the TZ3 for £169.95, I've used them in the past and they're reliable. They are out of stock at the moment though.